new law build your own firearm illegal?

K

Koda94

New member
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150109/batfe-rings-in-the-new-year-with-more-executive-gun-control

Ive never done it but I like the idea that I could do it and the idea of prohibiting it doesnt seem to solve any issue other than further erode our right to arms. Its my understanding that as long as you do the work yourself and do not sell the firearm your fine.

From what I read in the article above said machinery and/or fixtures ("tools or equipment") would be illegal to let others use for constructing their own firearm so IOW that means no more build parties. Can someone clarify if that is true?

I guess what Im not clear on is what qualifies as an "unlicensed machine shop" would that be a home mechanic or individual who lets you come over and use his machinery or fixtures for free (AKA "build party")?

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...ling-2015-1-manufacturing-and-gunsmithing.pdf
 
The threshold comes into play when you're doing it as a business.
Click to expand...

I understand that, what youve summarized is already whats in place. So to clarify, then whats changing with the proposed legislation? Especially in regard to a private individual building his own firearm?
 
That article is needlessly confusing to the layman.

For the most part, it details the ATF's reaction to the use of so-called 80% receivers. The idea is that an unfinished receiver would not be a functional firearm, would not need a serial number, and could be sold off the books.

There has been some question over what does or doesn't constitute an 80% receiver. That's what the ATF statement attempted to clarify (albeit quite badly).

For an individual who is making a gun for personal use, nothing has changed.
 
Koda94 said:
From what I read in the article above said machinery and/or fixtures ("tools or equipment") would be illegal to let others use for constructing their own firearm so IOW that means no more build parties. Can someone clarify if that is true?

I guess what Im not clear on is what qualifies as an "unlicensed machine shop" would that be a home mechanic or individual who lets you come over and use his machinery or fixtures for free (AKA "build party")?
Click to expand...
I don't see anything in the article to suggest there is anything unlawful about allowing others to use your machines to perform their own work to complete an 80 percent receiver (or even to make a receiver from a raw ingot of the appropriate alloy).

My admittedly fuzzy recollection of why a certain AR shop ran afoul of this regulation wasn't over who owned the machinery, but who actually did the work. My understanding (please correct me if this is incorrect) is that the machinery was/were CNC machining centers. The only "work" the owners of the 80 percent receivers did was to mount the receiver in the machine and push the button. I think the BATFE argument was that the majority of the "work" involved in that process was the effort put forth by whoever wrote the CNC program to control the machine. I don't approve of the regulatory limitation but, given that the regulation says what it says, I have to concede (grudgingly) that the BATFE might just have been right (for once).\

But it's a nebulous area, because the regulation clearly wasn't written to address or even anticipate CNC machines. Getting back to conventional machines, I used to know the proprietor of a small, one-man machine shop. He was a former Seabee in Vietnam, and he knew some other Vietnam veterans. He allowed at least one of them to complete an 80-percent receiver on his Bridgeport milling machine. I think that was perfectly within the law. The regulation doesn't address who owns the machine, it addresses who does the work. If the owner of the receiver sets up the receiver in the machine, installs the cutter in the machine (and owns his own cutters), makes the adjustments to set the depth of cut, and then stands there and turns the wheel to advance the piece along the cutter -- I'd say the individual is doing his own machining.

If that were a CNC machine and somebody else had already written the program -- what are your thoughts as to who did what percentage of the remaining 20 percent needed to complete the receiver?

I've thought about getting an 80 percent AR receiver and finishing it, but my ex-Seabee acquaintance had sever health problems and closed up the shop about two years ago. I don't know any other machinists, so I have no access to the equipment needed to perform the machining.
 
Here's one area where it gets extra-tricky.

I own and carry a handgun that is probably legally a home-built firearm. It started life as a Ruger New Vaquero but it has a custom cylinder in 9mmPara and a barrel replacement to a true .355" spec 9mm barrel. If a gunsmith did this level of modification they would need a handgun manufacturer's license. If that wasn't enough it also has a gas-powered shell ejector and magazine feed system unique in personal weapons. It is quite possibly the world's most heavily modified handgun and the only street-practical magazine fed revolver I am aware of.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/03/03/maurice-frankenruger-magazine-fed-revolver/

I built it myself, and invented the gas-powered shell ejector and mag feed system. I did the work at Xerocraft in Tucson AZ, a "Makerspace/Hackerspace" where I could rent time on a Bridgeport-type mill and a 1956 Logan 11" lathe that was awesome despite a busted reverse gear :).

Xerocraft also has a 3D printer - probably more than one by now, I last visited in Jan. of 2013.

http://xerocraft.org/

Makerspaces are potentially awesome places to do your own gunsmithing, but the new BATFE rules (which were NOT originally aimed at these guys!) could force them to ban gunsmithing of the type I did at Xerocraft, which would be a damned shame.

What the BATFE are trying to shut down is places that would sell you an 80% receiver, let you bolt it into a jig out back and hit the "on" switch on a CNC machine that they already set up. As others have mentioned, this was seriously legally edgy territory under the old rules and probably didn't need new rules to put a stop to it.

In stark contrast, I didn't use CNC techniques to build Maurice! It was pure old-school with lots of experimentation and hand-cutting of metal.

Unfortunately, if we try and save Makerspace gunsmithing we'll run head-on into the fact that more or less every Makerspace has a 3D printer and that will scare the ever-lovin' poop out of various powers that be. Very few Makerspaces will want to go to the trouble of becoming licensed gunsmiths...but then again, if we get some grants going from the NRA...hell, maybe that's the answer?

Makerspace gunsmithing could be a place where really radical new designs by new gunsmiths start to happen, with both old-school techniques, 3D printing or some bizarre combination. Just as one example, last I checked Xerocraft was experimenting with using 3D printing to create molds for cast aluminum small-production parts...ponder what could be done with THAT.

Maurice is proof that really, really weird stuff can come out of those rent-a-mad-scientist's-laboratory places :). As bizarre as it is, I cannot get it to jam...the feed path is dead straight and it also doesn't care about overall length...it'll feed rounds that would choke a Glock to death. It'll feed empty shells, full wadcutters, whatever.

Food for thought...
 
Koda94 said:
Aguila, I'm not certain but I think there are fixtures available to finish an 80% AR without a mill most notably the "AR15 easy jig" is available: http://www.80percentarms.com/collect...ar-15-easy-jig
Click to expand...
Yes, there are, and I've seen one version of such jigs. I just learned that there is apparently something similar for 1911 receivers.

That said, the shop/manufacturer who got busted for having receiver parties was not handing people a jig and a DeWalt power drill, they were allowing buyers of their 80 percent receives to come in on Saturdays to finish off the receivers on the same CNC machine centers that the company used to make complete ARs on Monday through Friday.
 
...they were allowing buyers of their 80 percent receives to come in on Saturdays to finish off the receivers on the same CNC machine centers that the company used to make complete ARs on Monday through Friday.
Click to expand...

Yeah...but the problem with this is, from the BATFE's point of view, it's the setting up of the part and machinery that's 90% of the work. Actually running the machine is 10% of it...and the buyers of the unfinished parts were only doing that 10%. Grudgingly, I gotta say that under the intent of the rules, these build parties were stretching things.

That is NOT what I did building Maurice!
 
All this re intrepetation might do is make other platforms for make your own gun available that can be done with a dremil tool. So far with just a little looking I have seen AR, 1911 and Sten and the sten was a semi auto and various US parts were available to get around the foreign parts limitations.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
If that were a CNC machine and somebody else had already written the program -- what are your thoughts as to who did what percentage of the remaining 20 percent needed to complete the receiver?
Click to expand...

I have a career in mfg and started out in a precision sheetmetal shop when I was 19 as a General Shop position, which unofficially I was called a "button pusher". I would load blanks into a CNC sheetmetal turret press and... wait for it, push the button. I wouldn't even call that 1% of the operation...
 
I didn't read the linked articles, but am kind of "assuming" they are about the new ruling on what constitutes manufacturing concerning the 80% lowers. If so, I have seen and read that, and am a manufacturer, and so can comment on it.
First, it is still legal to make your own firearm. It must still follow firearm laws, just as before. You can sell it if you wish. Making and selling regularly will get you in trouble, and is not clearly defined, and is done on a case by case basis.
As for the unfinished lowers. A lot of businesses were selling these lowers at a price that covered the lower plus some time where they allowed the customer to use their machine to finish the lower themselves. Also, some shops were selling time allowing people to run equipment to finish their own lowers. Even further, some people were doing just enough work to call it a finished lower, and then giving it to a shop to finish, so it would look professional and not chopped up.
Until now, all this was legal.
Now, all of these "sevices" require that the businesses be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The only way around that is to do all the work on equipment that you own.
 
And if set up as a licensed firearm manufacturer, all the lowers produced have to be serialized and the serial numbers reported to the ATF, and all sales of the finished lower have to be processed by an FFL with a 4473. Which is the purpose of the new rules--to limit the production of untraceable "ghost guns." though why anyone thinks that tracing is an effective investigative technique is beyond me--all you find is the first buyer, maybe a few transfers, but not the possessor of the gun at the time of crime, when it comes to stolen guns.
 
Actually, common firearms manufactured are not reported to atf. Nfa firearms are reported yearly. Common firearms manufactured are noted in the books of the manufacturer, and so can be traced. In the event that the manufacturer goes out of business, the books must then be sent to atf.

Oh, there is no mistake. Gun control is, and never has been about crime. It has always been about control.
Control of the people as a whole.
Actually, crime is good for business, as far as government is concerned.
They cannot justify large law enforcement budgets, and ever more encroaching laws without lots of crime as a reason for doing so.
 
Gunfixr said:
Now, all of these "sevices" require that the businesses be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The only way around that is to do all the work on equipment that you own.
Click to expand...
All the examples you cited seem to involve the shop receiving some compensation for the use of the machines. What about:

  1. A friend owns a machine shop. He allows me to use his milling machine on a Saturday, when the shop is closed but he's in there to do billing in the office?
  2. I own a lathe and a drill press, my friend down the road owns a milling machine. We often use each other's machine for tasks appropriate to the respective pieces of equipment. No money ever changes hands. "Business"?
 
Still now illegal, unless the machine shop has a manufacturer license.
That is because you, the person with the incomplete lower, do not have control over the equipment, the shop does. They are allowing you to use equipment that you normally would not have access to.
Even if you worked there, and are not allowed to do personal work, and did it, it's now illegal.
Monetary gain is not required. It's about the builder outsourcing.
 
Now were finally getting to what I was asking what is defined as an "unlicensed machine shop"?

What if one has a friend that owns a mill as a hobby whom does not have a buisness, and doesnt mind me using his mill for projects?
 
Thechnically still illegal, since you don't own or control the equipment, he does.
Under the new ruling, that makes him the "manufacturer".
 
I have a printout of it, as they send us copies of anything they come out with. I went back and looked at it again.
It covers both businesses and individuals. The only way to be legal now is to do it yourself on equipment you have direct control over, or for the person or business who does control the equipment to have a manufacturer license.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top